ArticleEcancermedicalscience2022
Information-sharing experiences of professionals looking after children with cancer: a qualitative exploration from a specialist paediatric oncology unit in India.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Communication Strategies to Improve Child Participation in Triadic Consultations Within Healthcare Settings: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on disclosure of diagnosis and related issues in childhood cancer: A mixed methods systematic review.International journal of nursing sciences · 2026Review
- Pioneering psycho-oncology: A collaborative journey for medical and psychology students atEcancermedicalscience · 2025Article
- Nurses' perceptions of compassionate care in pediatric oncology: a qualitative interview study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Children with cancer: Are we healing the body & missing the mind?The Indian journal of medical research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Childhood cancer often involves a long-term engagement of children and their parents with health services. During this journey, communications between professionals, parents and young people can be stressful for all the stakeholders. This study explores the communication preferences in paediatric oncology. Objectives: The objective of the present exploratory qualitative study was to understand the views of professionals regarding information exchange during cancer treatment of children and complement these findings with clinic-based ethnographic observation of real-life consultations. Methods: Using qualitative methods, in-depth interviews were conducted with paediatric oncology professionals. The interviews had been audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Alongside in-depth interviews, real-life interactions between parents, professionals and children were observed. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis framework as suggested by Braun and Clark. Results: Paediatric oncology professionals ( Conclusion: Paediatric oncology professionals need to be sensitive about the dynamic nature of information needs while interacting with children and parents of children with cancer. The above findings may help tailor the discussions that professionals ought to have with families with a child with cancer. The results may contribute to the understanding as well as to developing training courses on communications in paediatric oncology for low- and middle-income countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.